845 
A LEGAL CASE IN CALIFORNIA. 
An interesting case has just been tried in the courts in Los Angeles, 
Cal. A nurseryman named Cunningham brought 400 lemon trees to 
Los Angeles some time ago and they were found to be infested with 
Black Seale. The county officers notified Mr. Cunningham that they 
would have to be fumigated, and he told them he would be glad to 
have them do the work. One of the officers, Mr. MeMullin, then fumi- 
gated the stock in the car in which it was shipped. Upon subsequent 
planting, some of the trees died back, and the nurseryman claimed 
damages. The matter was submitted to arbitration, and Mr. Cunning- 
ham, not being satisfied with the result, brought suit against John 
Scott, horticultural commissioner, and his assistant, Mr. MeMullin, 
for damages. The case was decided in favor of the defendants, the 
judge holding that Mr. MeMullin had exercised the usual precautions, 
that he was a competent individual, and that the damage to the stock 
was not the result of negligence or lack of information on his part. 
The damage resulted, in all probability, from the fact that the strength 
of the cyanide differs in different packages, and even in different parts 
of the same package. It was shown that the most careful men some- 
times fail to fumigate without injury, and in this case the plaintiff was 
held to have assumed the risks inherent in the process itself. The law 
requiring fumigation is in the nature of a police regulation, in the 
enforcement of which it often happens that some individuals must 
suffer loss, because the law is general and can not be modified to suit 
particular cases. 
CORRECTIONS. 
By inadvertence, on page 295 of volume V, INSECT LIFE, we referred 
to Mr.O. E. Janson, the well-known natural history agent and bookseller 
of London, England, as “the late O. E. Janson.” We had somehow 
received the impression that Mr. Janson was deceased, but we have 
had the best assurance from him since, that he is still in the flesh, and 
we hope he may remain so for many years to come. 
“The last paragraph of my paper on ‘Arsenical Spraying of Fruit 
Trees while in Blossom,’ as published in the current volume of INSECT 
LIFE (pp. 181-185), should read as follows: 
It is therefore respectfully submitted whether there should be the intermission of 
spraying as proposed, urged, and sought to be made compulsory through legislation, 
until it shall appear beyond all controversy that the interests of the apiarist and 
the fruit-grower, each carefully considered and perhaps weighed one against the 
other, really demand it. 
“The substitution of agriculturist for ‘apiarist’ in the paper as printed 
had entirely hidden a point that I desired to make.”—({J. A. LINTNER. | 
